If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Possibly the most surprising thing about O's decision was that he agreed to send this many troops to A'stan.

While I agree that setting an 18-mo timetable seems ill-conceived to me, too ... it looks like his own party is the one beating him up, while Republicans are supporting his decision, with only minimal criticism of the 18-mo deal. Keeping in mind that, being a politician, the 18 mo timeline can also be some pressure on the Afghan govt to start getting its act together if they want US commitment. No doubt, it also was meant to "appease" those in the D party who would be up in arms about the significant troop increase.

It also appears to me that O may have finally made a tough decision. With the input that only would be available to the highest levels of command, he saw that it had to be done.

Some twist of fate when his own party batters him on this decision, but the Rs come to his defense. Maybe the Rs are not just O-haters after all?

What sounded like a young soldier called into the Dennis Prager show today. He recommended the book "The Bear on the Mountain", which was a study of the Soviet fiasco in A'stan. His point was that the goals of previous invaders was always to subjugate A'stan & "acquire" it. Even the T and AQ want control of A'stan for their own goals, without regard for the welfare of the citizenry.

The goal of the US & its allies is a different one, i.e. to allow the Afghanis to build a stable government and improve the standard of living of their people. If that is accomplished, they will not allow the T or AQ to take that away from them. There is no question, that given something to defend, the Afghans will defend it fiercely.

The greatest challenge is how to accomplish this kind of unified effort in a culture that has long been run by tribal chieftains; with many areas isolated from each other due to terrain. It's a hopeful sign that the Mortensen's book is required reading in the military!

It also occurred to me that the Russians would be royally ticked off if the US were to succeed where they failed so monumentally. OTOH, they, and lots of other countries, must undoubtedly recognize that allowing the wackos to control A'stan & use it as a way to get their hands on Pakistan's nukes, would be make them as unsafe as the US.

Last edited by Gerry Clinchy; 12-02-2009 at 04:35 PM.

G.Clinchy@gmail.com"Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

Given a system of government where we demand to know what is being done in our names and all participants have the right to speak freely, what makes you think that we have kept any part of our war strategy secret from al Qaeda and the Taliban at any time in the last eight years? The fact is that we formulate our policies in public and reap all the benefits and costs which that entails. If our policy encourages the Taliban to lie low for the next two years, we win.

I see ZERO benefit from announcing our MILITARY policies in public. Fighting what amounts to a guerrilla war on THEIR terms will be tough enough without letting them know in advance how long we're going to be there. To think that "we win" if the Taliban curtails their activity and waits us out is as naive as it gets.

Frank said it best: 'WHAT!!! 2 years is meaningless to a people that have been in conflict for years!!! Please tell me that you are not serious." They waited out the Soviets (with our help)...they can wait us out too, and then get back to the business of growing their terrorist network.

If this mission succeeds, it will be due to the mission being executed correctly. No, I'm no military strategist (don't think we have too many of those posting here...), but it may well take a cave-to-cave search in conjunction with the Pakistanis and a well-placed MOAB or two to break the back of the Taliban and al Qaeda...

...and that's the OPTIMISTIC point of view....God help our troops and their commanders.

.Render the terrorist, be it Al Qaeda, Taliban, etc, incapable of committing more acts of terrorism anywhere in the world. Educate the people of the region so that they are able to think for themselves rather than blindly follow terrorist organizations. Leave the Afghan govt/military in a condition of strength to stand up and fight against the corruption and violence in their own country without the aid of other countries, therefore keeping the terrorists down. Among other things... .....................

Just how long are you willing to take to achieve these goals? I know you'll say, "As long as it takes." Problem is, that could be a very, very long time.
In the meanwhile Al Qaeda moves to Yemen, the Sudan, Somolia etc. Do we move the fight there then?

JD

One cannot reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into. - Jonathan Swift

Just how long are you willing to take to achieve these goals? I know you'll say, "As long as it takes." Problem is, that could be a very, very long time.
In the meanwhile Al Qaeda moves to Yemen, the Sudan, Somolia etc. Do we move the fight there then?

JD

So what does victory look like to you? I noticed you conveniently edited out that part of the quote, you sneaky little bugger you...

BTW, I thought it was called the Global War on Terror, wasn't it? Besides, I am sure that they are already in all of the places that you mentioned, and more. Not to exclude the USA...Find them where ever they are and do what is necessary to disrupt the terror networks. (It doesn't have to ALL be military action, you know...)

What is Afghanistan's biggest export....opium...what now, is someone gonna suggest we are in it to take over the export of the opium market...IMHO leaving Afghanistan is the smart prudent strategy, telling them when you are leaving was the mark of a POTUS that has no previous military experience and almost no foreign relations experience..my other question is WHERE IS HILARY IN ALL THIS probably the quietest Sec of State we have had in decades..of course with her shrill voice that's not necessarily a bad thing

All my Exes live in Texas

Originally Posted by lanse brown

A few things that I learned still ring true. "Lanse when you get a gift, say thank you and walk away. When you get a screwing walk away. You are going to get a lot more screwings than gifts"

So what does victory look like to you? I noticed you conveniently edited out that part of the quote, you sneaky little bugger you...

BTW, I thought it was called the Global War on Terror, wasn't it? Besides, I am sure that they are already in all of the places that you mentioned, and more. Not to exclude the USA...Find them where ever they are and do what is necessary to disrupt the terror networks. (It doesn't have to ALL be military action, you know...)

Hmm...victory in Afghanistan? The one and only time would have to be Alexander, then he left too.

One cannot reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into. - Jonathan Swift

From Gallup.Com: Obama’s Plan for Afghanistan Finds Bipartisan Support

President Obama’s newly announced policy on Afghanistan receives support from 51% of Americans, while 40% are opposed. The policy has an unusually similar level of support among Republicans (55%) and Democrats (58%), compared with 45% of independents.